Slip Opinion
W.D.N.Y.2016Background
- Pro se inmate Marcus Micolo sued multiple DOCCS employees under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 after a January 29, 2015 cell extraction/use-of-force at Five Points CF. Several defendants moved for summary judgment in lieu of answer.
- Medical staff (Nurses Jones, Salotti, and Nurse Administrator Jansen) treated Micolo after the extraction for facial lacerations, abrasions, and pain; Micolo requested CT scans and alternative treatments which staff declined or he refused.
- Micolo alleged additional claims against CIU Officer Roberts, ORC Kline, Psychologist Sullivan, Chaplain Dewberry, RN C. Gardner, CO Paul Sabin (handcuffing), and Superintendent Michael Sheahan (water restriction, sewage in cell, denial of grievances, failure to re-photograph injuries).
- Court applied Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference and excessive-force standards and PLRA exhaustion rules for post‑incident medical claims.
- The court dismissed most defendants and claims on summary judgment (medical indifference and conspiracy claims), denied summary judgment as to Sabin (excessive handcuffing) and as to Sheahan for conditions-of-confinement (water deprivation/sewage), and denied Micolo’s motion to compel video without prejudice.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Adequacy of medical care on Jan. 29, 2015 | Micolo says staff refused CT/sutures and ignored prior facial surgery and pain | Staff say they examined, cleaned wounds, offered sutures (which he refused), provided meds and dressings; treatment was adequate | Dismissed: no Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference; disagreement over treatment is not constitutional violation |
| Post‑Jan. 29 medical care (exhaustion) | Micolo contends grievances were exhausted or process broke down after transfer | Defendants show Micolo failed to exhaust available DOCCS remedies for post‑Jan. 29 care | Dismissed as unexhausted and meritless on the record |
| Conspiracy / falsified reports (Roberts, Kline, Sullivan, Dewberry, C. Gardner) | Micolo alleges they conspired with Fuller and falsified reports to cover up wrongdoing | Defendants argue allegations are conclusory, lack agreement/overt acts and personal involvement | Dismissed for failure to plead facts showing conspiracy or personal involvement |
| Excessive force by CO Paul Sabin (handcuffing) | Micolo alleges cuffs/shackles applied excessively tight to cause pain and deter hearing attendance | Defendants argue objective injury lacking and point to medical records | Summary judgment denied as to this claim; triable issue remains on objective element/timing of complaints |
| Conditions of confinement against Superintendent Sheahan | Micolo says Sheahan left him without water and with sewage in cell after OB observation | Defendants say not objectively serious and deny culpable state of mind/personal involvement | Denied as to the water‑deprivation/sewage claim (adequate pleadings of objective and notice); other claims against Sheahan dismissed |
Key Cases Cited
- Dwares v. City of New York, 985 F.2d 94 (2d Cir. 1993) (personal involvement and conspiracy pleading standards)
- Colon v. Coughlin, 58 F.3d 865 (2d Cir. 1995) (ways to establish supervisory liability)
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (summary judgment burden on movant)
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, 477 U.S. 242 (genuine issue for trial standard)
- Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97 (prisoner deliberate indifference to serious medical needs)
- Chance v. Armstrong, 143 F.3d 698 (2d Cir. 1998) (disagreement over treatment not Eighth Amendment violation)
- Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825 (state of mind—awareness of substantial risk—required for Eighth Amendment)
- Hudson v. McMillian, 503 U.S. 1 (excessive force test; serious injury not required)
- Porter v. Nussle, 534 U.S. 516 (PLRA exhaustion covers all inmate suits about prison life)
- Ross v. Blake, 136 S. Ct. 1850 (no special‑circumstances exception to PLRA exhaustion)